Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Godhumor

(6,437 posts)
Wed Nov 2, 2016, 11:24 AM Nov 2016

Nate Cohn of NYT Upshot just casually confirmed difference in his and 538 methodology (Interesting!)

Nate Silver at 538 includes pretty much every single poll that comes out weighted by a number of factors including how "good" the pollster has been in the past. But everything gets included in the model. Everything (Excepting some known fake outfits). He has always maintained that even poor quality polls are useful for deducing trends.

Nate Cohn, Silver's replacement when he left the NYT for ESPN, has a model showing Clinton's probability of winning significantly higher than the one at 538. One of his followers asked how his model keeps showing Clinton leads in states versus aggregateors that have gone haywire thanks to firms like the Republican-owned, push-pulling Remington outfit flooding the market with narrative pushing polls.

Cohn's response shows a remarkably different philosophy in election modeling versus Silver's:

I basically only look at live interview polls and the few good online outfits https://t.co/PzHKkPhck3
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/793821027755298816

In other words, he doesn't even bother with junk polls. Whereas, Silver prefers an "all data has value and the more the merrier" methodology.

And depending on which way you align, the narrative of the race looks different.

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Nate Cohn of NYT Upshot just casually confirmed difference in his and 538 methodology (Interesting!) (Original Post) Godhumor Nov 2016 OP
Thanks still_one Nov 2016 #1
Cohn is also a lot more cautious and less willing to act like a cable tv pundit. geek tragedy Nov 2016 #2
Thanks for that Cha Nov 2016 #3
TY! Cha Nov 2016 #4
Fivethirtyeight also.... Adrahil Nov 2016 #5
The more posts like this, the better... tallahasseedem Nov 2016 #6
 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
2. Cohn is also a lot more cautious and less willing to act like a cable tv pundit.
Wed Nov 2, 2016, 11:28 AM
Nov 2016

Silver does a lot of clickbaity "The Clinton campaign is making a mistake" stuff as if Remington surveys are more insightful to Clinton's proprietary data machine

 

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)
5. Fivethirtyeight also....
Wed Nov 2, 2016, 11:38 AM
Nov 2016

uses a "fat tails" model, meaning that it considers uncertainty more actively than a lot of other models. In other words, the 538 model considers the race to be more uncertain than the Upshot model. Both Nates are very good at what they do, IMO.

Let's not over-state this though.... both still consider Clinton a heavy favorite.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Nate Cohn of NYT Upshot j...